Well this raises some issues, I think

www.rte.ie/news/2011/0916/italy.html

As ever, there is very little information. But an Italian court has taken a child into care and has now decided she should be placed for adoption on the grounds that her parents are too old to care for her. Interestingly they have apparently taken the view that the parents have not considered the child in making the decision to have her.

In view of previous debates about older women having children (not so many about blokes, for some reason) this is a strong decision which goes to the heart of "parents' rights". I wonder what others make of it ?

There are indications in the article that these particular parents may not have been coping well, and I assume that underpins the decision: it will not presumably have been made on the basis of age alone. Should we, as a society, support such parents in order to maintain the relationship? Or sever the tie, as the Italian court has decided? What are the implications for people with disabilities, or degenerative diseases, who yet decide to have children? In those cases maybe only one parent is affected, but not necessarily.

Orphan at an early age, when she is 18 months and the mother 57? Strange reason for taking the child away from the parents. The part about having to care for her aging parents sounds very Italian, and not very good grounds as far as I am concerned. Apart from that, though, no, they do not sound the ideal parents...

And if we take away children from all the parents that do not consider the children, when they decide to have some, then we are going to run out of adoptive parents very quickly.

If it is only a matter of age, or disability, I think the far better option would be to support the family. I've seen this work very well indeed with disabled parents, who were excellent parents with a bit of support.

Edited, since I completely forgot to add that I am very ambivalent about fertility treatment at ages when women are normally not fertile any longer. I am not sure that I have any really good reasons to be, it's just a feeling that it seems so wrong, and such feelings are rarley very reliable. But it does feel wrong, somehow. I find it hard to imagine being able to cope with sleepless nights, taking care of a toddler, dealing with teenagers, and so on, as you age. And there is something about knowing that you will probably die while your child is still young that feels wrong. But i am not sure that these are more than emotional objections, based on how things usually are. Perhaps it is something that could only be meaningfully discussed in each particular case?

I think there is a strong yuch factor in our attititudes to older mothers, but the origin of it is obscure to me. As I already noted there is much less controversy and disapprobation of older fathers, at least that is my impression. I am really not convinced there is anything rational about it at all.

The arguments usually presented to justify the disapprobation do not strike me as a rational foundation: but more often as a post hoc rationalisation. To think about just a few:

1. There is the "energy" argument, which you outlined. It seems to me that in another part of the forest we are worried about the "demographic time bomb", and I cannot see how you can have it both ways. There is reason to think that a person of 50 today is very likely to be fitter and healthier than a person of 30 in time past. At least in the west we have better nutrition and we have more leisure so that we are not worked into an early old age. Some of the current policy decisions are predicated on precisely this perception: in this country they are raising the retirement age and I do not think the UK is alone in this particular austerity measure. It seems strange to say that a person is fit for full time work at age 70, yet unfit for what constituted the alternative employment for women through most of our history. We are living longer but more importantly we are living longer as fit and active individuals, on average. So that argument does not obviously stand, to me

2. Another argument is that parents will be out of touch with the lives of their children if they are significantly older than we have considered usual in the past. But as I said, this objection does not seem to be applied to men in the same way. Perhaps that is a hangover from a time when child rearing was a matter for women alone: but I think that most people would at least aspire to greater sharing of child care responsibilities between the genders these days. If the thought or actuality of the older father is not distasteful to the same extent then I do not think that argument holds either

3. Death while the children are very young. Historically that is not at all unusual: death in childbirth was high, and death at relatively early ages, through accident or disease, was also common. It is nice that such things have diminished to the extent that we are quite unfamiliar with them: and these are gains we may not wish to lose. But as a reason for denying the choice? I am not convinced.

Unless we are prepared to make some rational case to interfere with those choices I do not think we really should be making policy decisions. Nor do I think we can make the decision on a case by case basis: because the decision to have children is not taken in that way, normally. The ease with which that is raised is instructive in itself: since I have never once seen a serious suggestion that steps should be taken to prevent old men from having children, even though it is often criticised or laughed at as folly. It is always interesting to see how ready we are to control female fertility in the name of some greater good, when the same considerations are not applied when the issue is solely male.

I can see how it'd be an issue.... I mean you're suppose to be supported by your parents at a young age and lets see the girl would be about 11 or 12 when her mother would be nearly 70? and the father if living would be 80....11 or 12 is still an age where you want your parents to be able to come outside and play with you or come to a school thing, plays or sports.

@Fiona in regardles to your 3rd point. While death at a young age is a historical thing, in this day and age reliance on parents at older ages is kind of an issue. I'm not sure how true it is outside the United States (and since this is an Italian case perhaps I am going to be saying something irrelevant) But, most 'children' are relying on their parents into their late 20's now. I think the idea is if the child can barely support themselves how are they suppose to also support their elderly parents.

And wow...I never really paid attention to that....that it's okay for old guys to knock up younger women and have kids....but not for older women to have children..... O_o....

There is indeed a longer and longer period of dependency in the uk and in the US. Why do you think that is?